Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Certainly a hypothetical Orthodox Pope in a reunited Orthodox Church would be honored as, and act as, the first among equals, but not the head of anything but the Diocese of Rome

Logged

Quote from: Nun M.

The dread Pantocrator...is also "Christouli mou", (my little Christ), who really listens when you run in to your neighborhood church on the way to work to cry and light a candle because your daughter is in trouble at school. The untouchable and all-holy Mother of God is also "Panayitsa mou", who really will take your part before the court of heaven because, just like your own mom, she’ll always stick up for her children, no matter how badly they’ve behaved.

There should be a permanent synod of all the Churches composed of the Patriarchs and Primates, and the Pope will be the presider of this synod. They should meet once or twice a year to work out inter-Church issues and also other broad issues. I think this is an urgent need that we have and this would be a good role for the Orthodox Pope moving forward.

The Orthodox Pope (no matter which Tawadros II you think that is) does not think he's head of the Church in the first place, so the way the question is worded is weird. It's probably better to say that if Rome ever gets its act together in terms that would make the Orthodox see that it is serious about this "union" business, this question would be non-existent (because Rome would know better).

btw Isa, you are asleep at the wheel. Normally you are the one posting these things, but I understand, you wish to share the wealth.

Sweet! Word games!

B for 500

Evidently not, as the Vatican forbids the patriarchs it tries to foist on Alexandria (3, one of which is now defunct) to take the title of the see: "Pope" (the original).

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Evidently not, as the Vatican forbids the patriarchs it tries to foist on Alexandria (3, one of which is now defunct) to take the title of the see: "Pope" (the original).

Was the Catholic Pope of Alexandria allowed to keep his title of Judge of the World?

The Catholic Pope has.

The Vatican's can not.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Evidently not, as the Vatican forbids the patriarchs it tries to foist on Alexandria (3, one of which is now defunct) to take the title of the see: "Pope" (the original).

Was the Catholic Pope of Alexandria allowed to keep his title of Judge of the World?

Catholics like keeping Orthodox traditions without necessarily keeping their meanings.

So you mean that they don't like to keep Orthodox traditions, then. You of all people should know that is the problem with all of their "Eastern lungs"...they try to keep the form, but mess with the content, and you end up with something that is neither fish nor fowl.

Evidently not, as the Vatican forbids the patriarchs it tries to foist on Alexandria (3, one of which is now defunct) to take the title of the see: "Pope" (the original).

Was the Catholic Pope of Alexandria allowed to keep his title of Judge of the World?

Catholics like keeping Orthodox traditions without necessarily keeping their meanings.

So you mean that they don't like to keep Orthodox traditions, then. You of all people should know that is the problem with all of their "Eastern lungs"...they try to keep the form, but mess with the content, and you end up with something that is neither fish nor fowl.

To tell you the truth I am sort of disappointed when I realized that. But all is not lost. As my Orthodox priest would say, sometimes you have to "fake it". That if you keep doing something externally, eventually it will form you internally to conform to what the external is. Perhaps if externally they can be Orthodox, someday they will come to understand its meaning and truly become Orthodox, and hopefully "infect" the rest of the Catholic Church with Orthodoxy.

Not to get too off topic (oops...already there), but that idea would make much more sense if the ECCs weren't churches of people who already left Orthodoxy for Rome. That's the whole reason they exist...to not be Orthodox anymore. Granted, this many centuries or decades later they are primarily composed of people who were born into this arrangement (and Latins fleeing the banality and irreverence of Rome while apparently still desiring to operate within the structure that made that irreverence standard for the largest of the churches in the communion, but that's another story). But it's not as if Rome can stop individuals from any rite from returning to Orthodoxy. It seems that for some it's more of a question of "where would we go if not here?" (And I don't mean that as an allusion to John 6:68; a Maronite acquaintance of mine recently told me that he should like to become Syriac Orthodox, as that is the most likely mother church of the Maronites if you do not accept Rome's contention that the Maronites "never broke communion with Rome", but that he feels it wouldn't fit quite right, as the Maronites are both Arabized and 'Europeanized' in a way that many Syriacs are not...so it's more like "this doesn't feel right, but it feels the least not-right of all options, because it's the one I know.")

Anyway, in an attempt to make this post relate to the OP more directly: It strikes me that both OO and EO already have an Orthodox Pope in the form of their respective Alexandrian Patriarchs, so I have to wonder if the recognition of an additional Orthodox Pope of Rome in some sort of 'special' role wouldn't in some sense be buying into Roman claims that were not universally accepted even back when we were all in union. I'm thinking here of Pope Leo I's letter to Pope Dioscoros of Alexandria, written some years before Chalcedon, which has been discussed here before (see this thread), which is one of the several examples of requests from the Roman Pope of ancient times which were not heeded (poster "Witega" mentions several examples in post #7 of the linked thread). In the hypothetical world of a reunited Eastern-Western Church (I would include us OO in this, too, for the sake of argument), is it likely that the Roman Pope would accept being ignored, dismissed, or (heaven forbid) even deposed by those he had previously been understood to be "above" in some real, authority/governance-based sense? I think the answer to that question (which I think is a "no", and shows no signs of changing in my lifetime) says more about what Orthodoxy would or wouldn't do with a Roman Pope professing Orthodoxy. As I've often tried to tell my Eastern Catholic friends, the ability (or "privilege", in their case) to teach your own, non-Rome centered theology means nothing if you cannot also teach against the errors of Rome on account of their incompatibility with your own theology. I would think the same would hold for the Roman Bishop in the reunited Church, when push comes to shove (i.e., he would have to be able to be deposed, as is in the Orthodox Church, not merely tender his resignation if he can be convinced to do so, as in the Latin Church).

Not to get too off topic (oops...already there), but that idea would make much more sense if the ECCs weren't churches of people who already left Orthodoxy for Rome. That's the whole reason they exist...to not be Orthodox anymore. Granted, this many centuries or decades later they are primarily composed of people who were born into this arrangement (and Latins fleeing the banality and irreverence of Rome while apparently still desiring to operate within the structure that made that irreverence standard for the largest of the churches in the communion, but that's another story). But it's not as if Rome can stop individuals from any rite from returning to Orthodoxy. It seems that for some it's more of a question of "where would we go if not here?" (And I don't mean that as an allusion to John 6:68; a Maronite acquaintance of mine recently told me that he should like to become Syriac Orthodox, as that is the most likely mother church of the Maronites if you do not accept Rome's contention that the Maronites "never broke communion with Rome", but that he feels it wouldn't fit quite right, as the Maronites are both Arabized and 'Europeanized' in a way that many Syriacs are not...so it's more like "this doesn't feel right, but it feels the least not-right of all options, because it's the one I know.")

Every unitate Church has their own story so it is so hard to generalize here about the reasons why certain bishops or priests came into union with Rome. It definitely is not a simple, "they wanted to be in communion with the Pope" or "they want to leave Orthodoxy."

I wonder though, in the same breath, can some Roman Catholic bishops/priests/parishes break off from Rome and come into Communion with the Orthodox Church? And if so, would their bishop be the Orthodox Bishop of Rome?

I wonder though, in the same breath, can some Roman Catholic bishops/priests/parishes break off from Rome and come into Communion with the Orthodox Church? And if so, would their bishop be the Orthodox Bishop of Rome?

It seemed good that a letter be written to the holy Pope Innocent concerning the dissension between the Churches of Rome and Alexandria, so that each Church might keep peace with the other as the Lord commanded.

112. It has pleased the Council furthermore to decree that as regards the dissension and discord between the Roman and the Alexandrian Churches a letter be written to the most holy Pope Innocent with the object of making each of the two Churches keep the peace with the other, which the Lord enjoins.

Interpretation.

Some difference or variance, as appears from the present Canon, had ensued between the Romans and the Alexandrians, on account of which it appeared reasonable to this C. to write to the Pope, who at that time was innocent I, with a view to making the two churches effect a reconciliation and make peace between themselves, just as the Lord enjoined by saying at one time, "I leave you peace" (John 14:27) (Note of Translator. — In both the A.V. and the R.V. of the English Bible these words are mistakenly and ridiculously translated as "Peace I leave with you!" without any other conceivable excuse than the stupidity of the translators.), and at another time, "Be and remain at peace amongst yourselves" (Mark 9:50). (Note of Translator. — In the A.V. we find this passage translated "Have peace one with another" in an effort to correct the A.V., but in reality making the sense worse yet, since in the original Greek it means not only "become or be" — momentarily, but also "remain" — forever, "at peace amongst yourselves." i.e., with each other, or each one with all the others of you; and not partly at peace, some one of you with some other one of you, at this particular time). But note here that the regional Council is correcting and giving advice to the monarch of Rome.

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Every unitate Church has their own story so it is so hard to generalize here about the reasons why certain bishops or priests came into union with Rome. It definitely is not a simple, "they wanted to be in communion with the Pope" or "they want to leave Orthodoxy."

Wait, wait, though...that's not what I wrote. I wrote that they exist to not be Orthodox anymore. Not that they don't want to be Orthodox. There are plenty of Eastern Catholics who want to be Orthodox, and/or already consider themselves to already be so. That makes no difference as to why their churches exist. They may have come into union with Rome under some other pretenses, but in the real world the Roman communion is defined by the relation (submission) of the Eastern Catholics to Rome, not Rome's relation to them.

I would think the same would hold for the Roman Bishop in the reunited Church, when push comes to shove (i.e., he would have to be able to be deposed, as is in the Orthodox Church, not merely tender his resignation if he can be convinced to do so, as in the Latin Church).

Perhaps if externally they can be Orthodox, someday they will come to understand its meaning and truly become Orthodox, and hopefully "infect" the rest of the Catholic Church with Orthodoxy.

A week or so ago, I made a note to respond to this post. However, I'm still not sure what I want to say to it -- I just can't decide whether or not I find it strange for Orthodox to dream the dream that you just described.

Perhaps if externally they can be Orthodox, someday they will come to understand its meaning and truly become Orthodox, and hopefully "infect" the rest of the Catholic Church with Orthodoxy.

A week or so ago, I made a note to respond to this post. However, I'm still not sure what I want to say to it -- I just can't decide whether or not I find it strange for Orthodox to dream the dream that you just described.

:thoughtful:

Well, if the ECs can be influcence and be Latinized, I'm just thinking, why can't it happen the other way? Why can't a very Orthodox ECChurch "infect" the rest of the Catholic Churches with Orthodoxy? I think that happened with the Second Vatican Council when there was influence from the Eastern Churches especially on the issue of vernacular languages and congregational participation in the Liturgy. I think Rome jusst didn't know how to handle what was suggested by the Melkite Patriarch which resulted in today's mess. But I believe it is a good start of a long, long process, and these bumps in the road are just the birth pangs.

I don't know if the fact that the RCC would have to be accepted into Orthodoxy just like any other mass conversion of any other non-Orthodox group is taken into account. Perhaps it would just be made to be in communion by gesture and prayer, it really would depend on the Patriarch of Constantinople and the synod attached to him. Only then when a true Roman Patriarch is re-established would there be an Orthodox pope.

why?Do you want to go in a plaza and cry because you can see the pope?why?Pope and all these-pope-worship is something completely strange for meand what about this papal infallibility?who is he?

No Orthodox Pope for me, thanks

We have one, and if you want to remain in communion, so do you:

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

I don't know if the fact that the RCC would have to be accepted into Orthodoxy just like any other mass conversion of any other non-Orthodox group is taken into account. Perhaps it would just be made to be in communion by gesture and prayer, it really would depend on the Patriarch of Constantinople and the synod attached to him. Only then when a true Roman Patriarch is re-established would there be an Orthodox pope.

Not quite. We don't have a supreme pontiff in Constantinople.

For one thing, the Vatican has parishes and bishops in the jurisdiction of every Orthodox Church. Even Greece.

« Last Edit: February 21, 2013, 01:04:54 PM by ialmisry »

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

I don't know if the fact that the RCC would have to be accepted into Orthodoxy just like any other mass conversion of any other non-Orthodox group is taken into account. Perhaps it would just be made to be in communion by gesture and prayer, it really would depend on the Patriarch of Constantinople and the synod attached to him. Only then when a true Roman Patriarch is re-established would there be an Orthodox pope.

For one thing, the Vatican has parishes and bishops in the jurisdiction of every Orthodox Church. Even Greece.

I don't know if the fact that the RCC would have to be accepted into Orthodoxy just like any other mass conversion of any other non-Orthodox group is taken into account. Perhaps it would just be made to be in communion by gesture and prayer, it really would depend on the Patriarch of Constantinople and the synod attached to him. Only then when a true Roman Patriarch is re-established would there be an Orthodox pope.

For one thing, the Vatican has parishes and bishops in the jurisdiction of every Orthodox Church. Even Greece.

Even in Sinai?

Just the occasional uniate Bedouin. Maybe a Jesuit Chorepiskopos or two, saying Latin Mass in some tent.

I'm sure there are already plans to build the New Sinai somewhere in the peninsula.

why?Do you want to go in a plaza and cry because you can see the pope?why?Pope and all these-pope-worship is something completely strange for meand what about this papal infallibility?who is he?

No Orthodox Pope for me, thanks

We have one, and if you want to remain in communion, so do you:

I am absolutely sure that he don't think he is what the Pope of Rome consider he is. He is just one of our Patriarchs.

He doesn't worry what the "Pope of Rome" thinks. Why do you?

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

dear it's his title and they must write itbut as you can see in the main menu they use the word Patriarch not the word Pope

anyway we use the word Patriarch mostly, you will read the word Pope only in officiall papers etc

Btw, is the text sheenj posted Katharevousa?

Hardly - the plain common Greek of today. Polytonika seem to survive only on Mount Athos. Monk Moses Hagiorites is the foremost example I can think of, whose Greek could be seen as katharevousa. He is my favourite contemporary hagiographer.

Hardly - the plain common Greek of today. Polytonika seem to survive only on Mount Athos. Monk Moses Hagiorites is the foremost example I can think of, whose Greek could be seen as katharevousa. He is my favourite contemporary hagiographer.

Hardly - the plain common Greek of today. Polytonika seem to survive only on Mount Athos. Monk Moses Hagiorites is the foremost example I can think of, whose Greek could be seen as katharevousa. He is my favourite contemporary hagiographer.

Hardly - the plain common Greek of today. Polytonika seem to survive only on Mount Athos. Monk Moses Hagiorites is the foremost example I can think of, whose Greek could be seen as katharevousa. He is my favourite contemporary hagiographer.

If you use Windows 7 they have a program called Snipping Tool. It's under accessories and it lets you take screenshots by using your mouse to select the area you want saved. It also lets you highlight and mark up the picture before you save it.

In some older documents I saw Κριτὴς τοῦ Κόσμου. Τhat one's even better.

Yeah, "Judge of the Universe" rulz!

It's even better than Vicar of Christ

One must needs be Vicar of Christ to judge the Universe: "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth." (Mat. 28:18)

Ah well, I just laugh at all those poetic titles Patriarchs gave themselves through the ages. I guess they're not meant to be taken too serious.

Actually it was given (along with two crowns) by the Emperor of the Romans and the EP, whom Pope Theophilos II (1010-1020) had reconciled:

Quote

During his tenure as Patriarch the persecution of Christians By Al Hakim became even more fierce, and many of them became Islamists or sought refuge in other countries. During these years, Theophilos was living in Constantinople as he could not stay in Egypt . He intervened in the dispute between Emperor Vasilios Voulgaroktonos (975-1025) and Patriarch Sergios II of Constantinople (999-1019) on whether or not to enforce the law of “solidarity”, and led the two to conciliation. From that time the Patriarch of Alexandria was given the title of “Judge of the Universe”, with the added privilege of wearing a second stole (Kritato).

the title of (Ecumenical judge was assumed by Theophilus, patriarch of Alexandria, A.D. 1000, on account of the reconciliation he eflected between the Emperor Basil III., and Sergius patriarch of Constantinople. The cause of the quarrel was that the patriarch had spoken ill of the emperor, and the emperor had laid violent hands on the patriarch. They had recourse to the judgment of the Lord of Alexandria, who having made two wax figures, one of the emperor and the other of the patriarch, cut out the tongue from that of the patriarch, and cut off the arm from that of the emperor; by which he intimated to each the severe punishments which they deserved, and which their exalted rank alone preserved them from suffering. Struck by the boldness and justice of his decision, they laid aside their mutual animosity, and as respective proofs of their gratitude to their judge, the patriarch placed on him his Epitrachelion (Omophorion) and the emperor his crown, and proclaimed him to be the (Ecumenical judge. In memory of this circumstance, the patriarch of Alexandria wears two Omophoria over his robes, and a double crown on his mitre.

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Actually it was given (along with two crowns) by the Emperor of the Romans and the EP, whom Pope Theophilos II (1010-1020) had reconciled:

Quote

During his tenure as Patriarch the persecution of Christians By Al Hakim became even more fierce, and many of them became Islamists or sought refuge in other countries. During these years, Theophilos was living in Constantinople as he could not stay in Egypt . He intervened in the dispute between Emperor Vasilios Voulgaroktonos (975-1025) and Patriarch Sergios II of Constantinople (999-1019) on whether or not to enforce the law of “solidarity”, and led the two to conciliation. From that time the Patriarch of Alexandria was given the title of “Judge of the Universe”, with the added privilege of wearing a second stole (Kritato).

the title of (Ecumenical judge was assumed by Theophilus, patriarch of Alexandria, A.D. 1000, on account of the reconciliation he eflected between the Emperor Basil III., and Sergius patriarch of Constantinople. The cause of the quarrel was that the patriarch had spoken ill of the emperor, and the emperor had laid violent hands on the patriarch. They had recourse to the judgment of the Lord of Alexandria, who having made two wax figures, one of the emperor and the other of the patriarch, cut out the tongue from that of the patriarch, and cut off the arm from that of the emperor; by which he intimated to each the severe punishments which they deserved, and which their exalted rank alone preserved them from suffering. Struck by the boldness and justice of his decision, they laid aside their mutual animosity, and as respective proofs of their gratitude to their judge, the patriarch placed on him his Epitrachelion (Omophorion) and the emperor his crown, and proclaimed him to be the (Ecumenical judge. In memory of this circumstance, the patriarch of Alexandria wears two Omophoria over his robes, and a double crown on his mitre.

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

Actually it was given (along with two crowns) by the Emperor of the Romans and the EP, whom Pope Theophilos II (1010-1020) had reconciled:

Quote

During his tenure as Patriarch the persecution of Christians By Al Hakim became even more fierce, and many of them became Islamists or sought refuge in other countries. During these years, Theophilos was living in Constantinople as he could not stay in Egypt . He intervened in the dispute between Emperor Vasilios Voulgaroktonos (975-1025) and Patriarch Sergios II of Constantinople (999-1019) on whether or not to enforce the law of “solidarity”, and led the two to conciliation. From that time the Patriarch of Alexandria was given the title of “Judge of the Universe”, with the added privilege of wearing a second stole (Kritato).

the title of (Ecumenical judge was assumed by Theophilus, patriarch of Alexandria, A.D. 1000, on account of the reconciliation he eflected between the Emperor Basil III., and Sergius patriarch of Constantinople. The cause of the quarrel was that the patriarch had spoken ill of the emperor, and the emperor had laid violent hands on the patriarch. They had recourse to the judgment of the Lord of Alexandria, who having made two wax figures, one of the emperor and the other of the patriarch, cut out the tongue from that of the patriarch, and cut off the arm from that of the emperor; by which he intimated to each the severe punishments which they deserved, and which their exalted rank alone preserved them from suffering. Struck by the boldness and justice of his decision, they laid aside their mutual animosity, and as respective proofs of their gratitude to their judge, the patriarch placed on him his Epitrachelion (Omophorion) and the emperor his crown, and proclaimed him to be the (Ecumenical judge. In memory of this circumstance, the patriarch of Alexandria wears two Omophoria over his robes, and a double crown on his mitre.

No problem. Btw, I originally learned the story from the Pope's deacon, as he was laying out HH's vestments.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth